What is your favourite positive argument for atheism/unbelief?

[Brian37]

The hell you do!

You wouldn't know a logical argument if it bit you in the ass.

Logical arguments are a process of creating a new statement from one or more existing statements. An argument proceeds from a set of premises to a conclusion, by means of logical implication, via a procedure called logical inference.  

They follow the form:

Premise 1
P2
P3
.
.
.
Conclusion.

This is called the syllogistic form.

For the conclusion to follow logically from the premises, every premise has to be sound (they have to be demonstrably true), and the entire logical argument has to be valid (it can not be fallacious).

I have never seen anything close to that from you.

Your premises are almost always unfounded assertions based on what you want to be true. And you arguments are always fallacious.  

Please, prove that you are indeed logical, and create one syllogism that will lead to one of your conclusions.


Here, I'll give you a starting point. Fill in sound premises that will lead to your conclusion:

P1
P2
P3
.
Conclusion - Too many people get fooled when they see a body and think that his-her consciousness
is dead too.

Cut the crap Simon.
Let us instead see this from wiki.


There is no universal agreement as to the exact scope and subject matter of logic (see § Rival conceptions, below), but it has traditionally included the classification of arguments, the systematic exposition of the 'logical form' common to all valid arguments, the study of inference, including fallacies, and the study of semantics, including paradoxes. Historically, logic has been studied in philosophy (since ancient times) and mathematics (since the mid-1800s), and recently logic has been studied in computer science, linguistics, psychology, and other fields.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic

It say.......VALID ARGUMENTS.....and other things as well.
My arguments are more than valid.
While there is no evidence that the consciousness or the I ever die there is a lot of evidence that the consciousness survive and is more free than when was stuck inside a body as also proven by thousand of NDEs experiences so I do have a valid argument and that follow a logic process.  

---

No, science does not say that because atoms move on that a single atom can behave like a adult in tact brain. Yes atoms move on, no shit, that does not make ANY god real, not yours not any, science merely says atoms make up everything. But there are huge buildups required to go from a single atom to an adult brain. You are trying to confuse a single tire as having the capability of being the in tact running car. When your brain dies YOU DIE, that is it, a single atom by itself cannot retain the same function as an in tact brain.

Atoms exist, atoms get recycled, therefor Allah. Still make sense to you?
Atoms exist, atoms get recycled, therefor Yahweh. Still make sense to you?
Atoms exist, atoms get recycled, therefor Buddha's reincarnation is true. Still make sense to you?
Atoms exist, atoms get recycled, therefor the Hindu creator God Bhrama is real. Still make sense to you?

How about the least complicated explanation as to why humans claim any god/s/deities? How about humans simply project a fictional concept of immortality because they like the idea and have vivid imaginations?

None of biological life or the universe needs a magic super cognition to explain. For the same reason you know Poseidon isn't needed to explain why hurricanes happen. For the same reason you don't need Thor to explain the existence of lightening.

You are making an hell of a confusion Brian.
Atoms are not an abstract entities like the consciousness.
Atoms can not build the consciousness.
Nobody build the consciousness.
The consciousness is already there and get more or less awareness according to the individual actions or not actions.
When the body die and it goes to the dogs so to speak there is a separation between this body and the consciousness.
Nothing really to do with atoms.  

If science merely says atoms make up everything then ask any scientist to give evidence that atoms make up the consciousness.
I can wait Brian but not for ever.  
I will wait until the next Christmas after that you lose the bet.  

What the hell are you smoking? ATOMS make up everything.  You are stupidly thinking "consciousness" having no mass means POOF a magic sky daddy. The speed of a car can be measured and speed isn't a physical thing, but the observation of a physical thing in motion. 

Atoms build up to the molecular level, which build up cells then organs, which leads to the brain IN MOTION. NO motion, no fuel no consciousness. Blow up your car engine into unusable pieces and see if you can speed in it. 

And none of your argument in any case points to your pet gap deity anymore than someone else can inscert their pet sky hero.

---

Muslim=I like what I was sold.
Jew=I like what I was sold.
Christian=I like what I was sold.
Buddhist=I like what I was sold.
Hindu=I like what I was sold.

Awesome, good for you, but do humanity a favor STOP pretending your club is the source of our species goodness. Nobody has any universal and neutral method to prove these clubs are anything more than human invented clubs.

Skeptics don't hate every religious individual, but do not expect us to blindly swallow your club because you open your mouth and utter something or type it and hit submit. GET IN LINE TAKE A NUMBER. You are NOT the center of the planet and neither is your religion.

I can't tell whether you're raging against me in all of this and it's making me paranoid. For the record, as I said, I'm not a Buddhist... but I do 'like what I was sold' to the extent that I agree with it but just as like what I was sold with any psychological theory or whatever that I agree with. Course I can get pissed if I think it's being misrepresented, but I think you'd be the same if you perceived someone misrepresenting ABBA (I'm afraid
I can't do that, cos they're cool ). Anyway, I don't think it's the source of humanity's goodness... indeed it goes very much against human nature... just a tool to reduce suffering by stepping back from shit... ie stepping back from 'attachment' to things or emotional states like anger. As you can see I'm not that good at it (at least right now), but that varies, and a better Buddhist simply would not care at all what other others thought about them... whether they were misrepresented etc... because that's what non-attachment leads to. So I'm not trying to sell it to you, just responding to a perceived attack... but at the same time, aware that that is attachment (to anger, pride etc) and therefore something I should let go for my own good... it's just harder sometimes than others, and I'm more self-aware/mindful sometimes than others.

---

I do not follow religions.
I instead follow logic.
We do not know who wrote the Bible.
Certainly not the Christian that came much later.
I am not an expert in Bible so I can not say whether what is written in the Bible is all truth all rubbish or some is true and some is rubbish in any case I take what make sense as good and what doesn't as bad.
That sentence that say.........Man created in God's image.......make a lot of sense that is why I explained to you my point.

Thanks for your answer. I understand what you're saying.

I am not "railing" against any individual nor trying to make anyone "paranoid". 

I am pointing out our species flawed evolution in that we gap fill and create clubs as a gap. That does have the real affect of creating social order and safety in numbers, but that is a false perception. Life was around long before humans and long before any written religion or stationary society.

My skepticism is based on our modern scientific knowledge and I don't give anyone a pass. I don't even see the word "atheist" as having any magic power to make an individual only do good or only do bad. The truth of all religions is "that was then, this is now". There are tons of empathetic individuals all over the planet, not because a religion makes them that way, but because our evolution produces the attribute of cooperation and empathy in that individual. I merely doubt ALL religions when someone claims it is coming out of antiquity in holy writings or holy people. 

If you have not read, and I keep pointing out this author and two books. If you want to understand my position "God The Failed Hypothesis" and "The New Atheism" both by Victor Stenger , in both books he debunks the idea of the need for a god/God/supernatural. But in the second book, "The New Atheism" in one of his later chapters he compares multiple religions WORLDWIDE, points out how each point to their "goodness" and claims to morality, and makes the point, and I agree, if everyone can point to those things, then it should be obvious that our behaviors are in us, not our labels.

Even Jefferson, without knowing how right he was in a modern scientific sense, saw goodness and morality in others who didn't share the same beliefs, "whence arises the morality of the atheist? It is idle to say, as some do, that no such thing exists".

I cant put it any more simply than, "That was then, this is now". We do know where morality comes from, it comes from evolution. It comes from our socializing and by that socializing we form groups, but that does not mean everything we do makes that group right about everything, and that group can be centered around very false perceptions. 

Humans for the most part ON AVERAGE, think locally and defend that which they are raised in. It does foster protection in a local sense, but the downside is at the same time, it produces divisions against other groups.

I don't give anyone a pass on this, logically speaking only. I want more humans to consider that what makes us different isn't as important to me as what we have in common. It still remains we are the same species with the same ability to be compassionate or cruel. There is not one nation that does not have prisons or hospitals.